- Query in any language with multilingual search
- Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
- See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Similar Documents
Explore similar documents to your case.We Found Similar Cases for You
Case T-596/24, CIT Coin Invest: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgerichtshof (Austria) lodged on 8 November 2024 – CIT Coin Invest AG v Zollamt Österreich
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62024TN0596
62024TN0596
With us you find everything. Try it now!
I imagine what I want to write in my case, I write it in the search engine and I get exactly what I wanted. Thank you!
Valentina R., lawyer
Official Journal of the European Union
EN
C series
—
C/2025/405
27.1.2025
(Case T-596/24, CIT Coin Invest)
(C/2025/405)
Language of the case: German
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Appellant on a point of law: CIT Coin Invest AG
Respondent authority: Zollamt Österreich
Questions referred
1.Are Articles 345 and 346 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC (1) to be interpreted as meaning that gold coins included in the list published annually by the Commission in the Official Journal of the European Union are always deemed to meet the criteria laid down in Article 344 of Directive 2006/112/EC and are therefore deemed to be coins covered by the tax exemption provided for in Article 346 of Directive 2006/112/EC, even if those gold coins did not meet the criteria laid down in Article 344 of Directive 2006/112/EC when they were imported?
2.Is it relevant to the answer to Question 1 that those gold coins did not meet the criteria laid down in Article 344 of Directive 2006/112/EC when they were first issued?
3.Is Article 345 of Directive 2006/112/EC to be interpreted as meaning that gold coins are deemed to be included in the list published annually by the Commission in the Official Journal of the European Union if they have a corresponding face value as stated in that list, even if those gold coins did not meet the criteria laid down in Article 344 of Directive 2006/112/EC when they were first issued?
4.Is it relevant to the answer to Question 3 that those gold coins did not meet the criteria laid down in Article 344 of Directive 2006/112/EC when the aforementioned list was published?
5.Is Article 345 of Directive 2006/112/EC to be interpreted as meaning that gold coins are deemed to be included in the list published annually by the Commission in the Official Journal of the European Union if they have a corresponding face value as stated in that list and they meet the criteria laid in Article 344 of Directive 2006/112/EC but are minted (and issued) only after publication of the list and do not constitute further issues of gold coins already expressly stated in the list?
6.Is point (2) of Article 344(1) of Directive 2006/112/EC to be interpreted as meaning that gold coins are to be regarded as legal tender in their country of origin within the meaning of that provision if, on the basis of national statutory provisions, they must be accepted at face value only by public-sector cash offices and by the company in which the public authorities hold a majority interest that minted and issued those gold coins, but not by all creditors in regular payment transactions?
Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1).
—
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/405/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
—